Posted on 08/08/2009 10:36:48 AM PDT by Mariner
Big Pharma and probably Big Insurance have probably kicked in with the Democrats in DC
While this initially may appear to be a good business move on their part, the boards of these companies may not CLEARLY realize that their owners are the productive class.
It's time to sell every stock and mutual fund that hold these stocks. The board must hear from the "owners".
They think $80bil was affordable...an $80bil that would come out of the consumers pocket. However, I wonder how affordable their decision will seem in the light of their stock price dropping 50%...or 60...or 75%?
I do not own any Pharma stocks.
What exactly has “big Pharma” done now to deserve our wrath?
1. Vocal Support of "Healthcare Reform"
2. $150mil in advertising to support that reform on TV.
They thought that they could control Hitler and his gang.
Thing is: there is no possibility of an accommodation with a regime that has a totalitarian mindset. It must be resisted ab initio or not at all because the day will quickly come in which resistance has become futile.
I think these stocks will go up. They, as a group, have offered $80billion in price concessions over 10 years, or $8 billion a year. Considering 20% more people will be covered and consuming their drugs, I believe they will see their revenues increase by well beyond the $8billion per year.
“BIG” pharma, “BIG” insurance; you sound like a Dem.
Keep the stock if it has a good future, sell when you have a nice profit and donate the proceeds to FR.
As a general rule, I keep politics out of my investment decisions. It is better to make money where you can (which is hard enough for us little guys) and then put the money to a good cause.
No, kidding. Is there a “little” pharma? Or a just-the-right-size pharma?
Usually, when the word “big” precedes an industry, it’s a synonym for “evil”. Being that “Big Pharma” is keeping my kidney from rejecting, I don’t care whether they’re big, little, or anything else.
As for their jumping on the bandwagon, the taxpayers finance a huge chunk of healthcare, and thus, pharma receives taxpayer dollars. They are being forced to comply. Just take a look at GM and the financial institutions. You depend on someone, you are beholden to them.
With this deal, the big pharma companies profits will go through the roof. The taxpayer and patient, however, will suffer. That’s the bottom line. They’ve made sweet backroom deals of which the details are still murky.
I worked in the pharmaceutical industry as a field sales rep for 10 years. It’s a VERY strange industry.
It was sarcastic terminology for a serious point.
Obama Reverses Stand on Drug Industry Deal
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Published: August 7, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/08/us/08lobby.html?_r=1&hp
Posted on Saturday, August 08, 2009 1:56:51 PM by Gothmog
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2311452/posts
OK. The problem with web communication is that some things don’t come through when in type only.
Pharma certainly has some challenges; large health systems are not wanting samples or their docs to have “perks”, and many blockbusters are now off patent.
One of the biggest “challenges” I have seen is the sales/marketing business model they have been using. The holy grail has been “Increased Share Of Voice”, which has been made possible by incrementally increasing the number of reps in the field, usually in response to competitive threats. (Blockbuster boom bucks certainly fed this insane model in the past)
Bottom line is TOO MANY REPS in the field has forced most practices into the need to severely limit or completely deny access to the physicians.
Pulling samples out of the practice is something that I find to be really inconsiderate to the patients and mostly just plain stupid. LOTS of meds have tolerability issues and/or titration schedules, so initial scripts can involve either a needless co-pay (if the meds just get tossed because they make you sick) or several co-pays, which is NOT fun. Also, people FEEL better when they leave with something tangible. Some people just never get around to filling an RX, but would be more likely to do so if they had a sample to try first. Ask yourself, “you feel like sh*t, and you just spent an hour and a half a the clinic,,,do you now want to wait another 30 minutes at the pharmacy or do you want to go home with your starter samples?”
Docs with perks? Very humorous. A physician can be trusted with your life, but they cannot be trusted to make the right decision if someone buys them a lunch. Stupid.
I agree with you; I didn’t mean to imply that samples shouldn’t be used, lunches are bribes, etc. As for the number of reps, I had not really thought about that before.
GM and Chrysler thought they'd found a sugar daddy, also. If the pharmaceutical companies think Zero's going to let them turn a profit and he won't take over, they're in for a big surprise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.